By Sharon Roznik • The Reporter [email protected]

Owners of Rosendale Dairy met with a temporary roadblock Wednesday in
their plan to operate the largest dairy in the state.

A variance request to install holding tanks on the property as a human
wastewater treatment system was denied Wednesday during an unusually
well-attended meeting of the Fond du Lac County Sanitation, Shoreland
& Floodplain Zoning Board of Adjustment.

“The board denied a variance because the applicant did not prove any
unnecessary hardship,” said county Code Enforcement Officer Ernst
“Spike” Clarenbach.

A county ordinance regulating on-site wastewater treatment systems
prohibits holding tanks, except in vary rare instances, Clarenbach
said.
Rosendale Dairy co-owner Jim Ostrom said the business will now move
ahead with installing a mound system on the property. The holding
tanks would have served three employee restrooms located in the barn
of the new dairy operation, located at N8997 County Trunk M in the
town of Rosendale.

Mound system
“We’ve been preparing to install a mound system for a very long time,
but we were just looking for a more practical system,” Ostrom said.
“Apparently, the board wasn’t particularly interested in
practicality.”

A statement to the board from concerned citizens group PEPL (People
Empowered to Protect the Land) maintains that Rosendale Dairy should
have applied for a sanitary permit before initiating construction of
the farm.

“They had notice that they were moving too quickly: they initiated
construction before they had the required DNR approvals … and DNR
cited them for it. On August 26, the DNR ordered the applicant to
immediately cease construction because the proper approvals had not
been received,” the PEPL letter states.

Ann Lindstrom, who owns property on Olden Road that abuts the 100-acre
Rosendale Dairy parcel, said she was disappointed the board even
allowed for installation of temporary holding tanks until the mound
system is completed. She was among the 35 people who attended the
hour-long meeting.
“After the Rosendale town chairman pointed out that a port-a-potty is
too cold in December, basically it became business as usual for
Rosendale Dairy,” she said.

Jamie Saul, a staff attorney for Midwest Environmental Advocates, a
pro-bono legal counsel for PEPL, said the dairy’s request was a
classic example of “self-imposed hardship,” and it should be held to
the same county ordinances as other farms, businesses and homes in the
area.
“The dairy failed to plan carefully, and for other reasons of its own
making, the dairy compacted the ground around the site so that it may
not be able to install underground storage tanks,” he said.

Eric Godfrey of Ripon submitted a letter to the Board of Adjustment
opposing the variance.
He wrote: “We would be very concerned if any person or organization
would ask to be exempted from these rules governing water treatment
and quality.”

Documentation
The proposed 8,300-cow dairy operation met with another hurdle last
month when the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources decided to
require additional environmental documentation.
The decision came as the Rosendale Dairy partners were expecting to
receive notice of a draft permit needed to complete the facility based
on the operation’s already extensive environmental research and
assessment filings with the agency.
Todd Ambes, administrator of the DNR Water Division, said the first
environmental assessment report addressed the impact of a 4,000-head
operation. However, when reviewing citizen comments, DNR officials
were made aware of the dairy’s goal to double animal numbers in the
second phase of the project.

Clarenbach said the county is not at all fond of holding tank systems
and considers them a last resort. In the case of Rosendale Dairy, it
was just easier for them to use holding tanks than put in a mound
system.

“All the soil around the construction area has been disturbed, so they
will have to locate the system either across Highway M or on the
southern portion of their property,” Clarenbach said.
Ostrom said the county ordinance that dates back to 1985 was not
designed to contemplate a contemporary facility of Rosendale Dairy’s
size and scale.

“We were trying to take the more logical option of water disposal, and
it would have made sense for this facility,” Ostrom said.

“And if the public is opposed to these tanks, they are opposed on
principle, not on reason.”